Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re:That is okay (Score 1) 254

If unions were just collective bargaining groups nobody would oppose them. The problem are the laws that give them extra rights and the fact they typically resort to violence to get their way.

Workers should absolutely have the right to bargain as a collective. But the employer should also have the right not to negotiate and to fire all of those employees and hire replacements. The reason people don't like unions is they will resort to violence to prevent willing people from taking the jobs they abandoned.

Comment: Use it as a weapon (Score 1) 328

by trout007 (#49142511) Attached to: The Programmers Who Want To Get Rid of Software Estimates

Use your estimate precision as a bargaining chip for things your need. Typically what impacts my estimate is requirement uncertainty. So give an estimate with an error +200/-10% error. If we could just finalize these particular requirements my estimate would improve. This way a manager will focus on getting the requirements fixed.

I was once given a "project" and I asked for the requirements document. They said there are no requirements so I happily said great I'm done designing!

Comment: Re:Another reason contracts should not be enforcea (Score 1) 196

by trout007 (#49099993) Attached to: A123 Sues Apple For Poaching Employees

There are much easier solutions that already exist like credit card companies. My Amex has buyer protection. If a vendor screws me over (which happens from time to time) I call Amex up and the investigate and refund the charges. The cost is what they charge to the merchants. So both the merchant and I are voluntarily paying a fee. The merchant gets a larger customer base by taking Amex and I get buyer protection.

The only people that benefit from the current system are the crooks. The whole system exists to unload the cost of doing business with shady companies to the tax payers.

Comment: Re:Reality Flip Switch (Score 1) 252

by trout007 (#49099915) Attached to: No Tech Bubble Here, Says CNN: "This Time It's Different."

Normal deflation isn't a big deal. The computer industry has operated under price deflation since day 1. My first computer was an Apple II GS. That thing was over $2k in the early 90's.

Also the whole industrial revolution occurred under deflation.

Now I assume you are talking about deflation right now. Yes after years of easy money a tightening will cause a bad depression. But that is the cute not the disease.

Comment: Re:Another reason contracts should not be enforcea (Score 1) 196

by trout007 (#49097749) Attached to: A123 Sues Apple For Poaching Employees

Or people would actually do some research into a person they are about to sign a deal with. As it stands now people really don't bother because if the deal falls through they can use other peoples money (taxes) to hire goons (police) to make the other person pay.

Let's say you get three bids for a contract. You go with the low bidder because you always can go to court to get them to adhere to the contract. If you actually took the risk yourself you would either have to go through a third party (like e-bay or credit card companies that have buyer protection) or actually take the risk yourself. Either way is superior in my opinion.

Comment: Re:You miss the center by how much? [Re:Kinda notn (Score 2) 121

by trout007 (#49094727) Attached to: The Science of a Bottomless Pit

Great check! I found my error. My G calculation was pulled from a chart where the distance was measured in km (not meters). Here is the new code. This shows it takes about 19 minutes to reach the center and you miss by 310 km.

[t,y]=ode23(@orbit_ode,[0 90*60],[6500e3 0 0 2*pi/(24*3600)]);



function dx=orbit_ode(t,x);
        dx=zeros(4,1);%This is a pre-initialization.

        %x(1) = r position
        %x(2) = r velocity
        %x(3) = theta position
        %x(4) = theta velocity

        dx(1)= x(2); %Velocity
        dx(2)= x(1)*x(4)^2-(.0037e-3*x(1)-3.35e-13*x(1)^2);
        dx(3)= x(4);
        dx(4)= (-2*x(2)*x(4))/x(1);


This is relative to a fixed observer outside of earth.
If you subtract out the earth rotation you get this.

Comment: Another reason contracts should not be enforceable (Score 0) 196

by trout007 (#49094257) Attached to: A123 Sues Apple For Poaching Employees

Contracts should exist similar to loans or buying things on ebay. There is risk to both parties making the contract and you can only go by the reputation of the party you are dealing with.

By having governments enforce contracts you just externalize the costs of dealing with dishonorable people.

If these employees signed a contract with A123 and broke it the only thing A123 should be able to do is make those contracts public and try to hurt the reputation of those employees.

Comment: Re:Kinda notnews (Score 1) 121

by trout007 (#49093973) Attached to: The Science of a Bottomless Pit

OK I created the following Matlab code: The G term was a polynomial best fit to the gravity as a function of depth. The initial angular velocity is at the equator.

[t,y]=ode45(@orbit_ode,[0 200],[6500 0 0 2*pi/(24*3600)]);


function dx=orbit_ode(t,x);

        %x(1) = r position
        %x(2) = r velocity
        %x(3) = theta position
        %x(4) = theta velocity

        dx(1)= x(2); %Velocity
        dx(2)= x(1)*x(4)^2-(.0037*x(1)-3e-7*x(1)^2);
        dx(3)= x(4);
        dx(4)= (-2*x(2)*x(4))/x(1);


The plot isn't very impressive. It looks like a line straight through the center. The min radius is 114m so basically over 6500m drop the center moves about 114 m.

Comment: Start using the term Intellectual Monopoly (Score 4, Insightful) 145

by trout007 (#49083505) Attached to: The Burden of Intellectual Property Rights On Clean Energy Technologies

Because that is what it really is. Intellectual Monopoly is not compatible with property rights. You either own your property and are free to transform it and sell it or you don't own it. Someone saying I can't configure my property is only possible with a government granted monopoly and has no basis in property rights.

Nothing is more admirable than the fortitude with which millionaires tolerate the disadvantages of their wealth. -- Nero Wolfe